M ESWARAN Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND CHAIRMAN, TAMIL NADU UNIFORMED SERVICES RECRUITMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. Saravanakumar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S.C. Herold Singh, learned Government Advocate for the Respondents.

(2.) The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking to challenge the order dated 20.05.2008, wherein by which, he was informed that he cannot be selected for the post of Police Constable Grade-II, though he had gone through the written test successfully and his character and conduct were verified and it was found that the Petitioner was facing a serious criminal case, which is registered in Crime No. 337 of 2007 in Palani Taluk Police Station and the trial is in progress with the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani. Therefore, in terms of Rule 14(b) of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, the Petitioner cannot be appointed. It is as against the said order, the Petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.

(3.) In the Writ Petition, notice of motion was ordered on 25.02.2009. It is the case of the Petitioner that subsequent to the issuance of impugned order, he was acquitted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani, by judgment dated 17.12.2008. In view of the acquittal, ineligible to be appointed is to be removed and, therefore, he should have an appointment. After filing the Writ Petition, the Petitioner realized that any subsequent acquittal by grant of benefit of doubt by the criminal Court will not help the case of the Petitioner and as per the amendment made to Rule 14(b) of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, even acquittal by grant of benefit of doubt, will enable the authorities to consider that having criminal back ground will operate as a disqualification.